winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

Following a rocky but promising start the cliquey little circle making up the Photo Critique and Analysis Section have shown that they cannot tolerate honest, accurate and to the point critique and it now very much appears to having become little more than a mutual admiration society.

When I tried to demonstrate a point which I felt should be aired using admittedly rather demonstrative means, instead of investigating my motives, I was instead totally banned from the site.

If Nightski, Lady Country's Mama or whomever else bend so easily to the will of a rather self centered and self opinionated member who blatantly uses this forum for his own self promotion then so be it.

It could have been a good thing for the UHH to have such a potentially helpful section for the members if it was run by people with a bit more guts.

It really is a shame that a wonderful opportunity has been let slip by.

Rob.

busted_shutter

Have said it before and sayin' it again...many have no clue what makes for a good photograph, nor do many care. They want it to "look nice", and are hesitant to say anything derogatory for fear of "upsetting" the picture-taker. Photographs...Snapshots...There is a difference.

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

That's an interesting slant on things Rob.
I seem to recall that you were suspended from that forum by ADMIN for posting a high quality pencil drawing as if it were your own photo.
A quite questionable tactic that I attempted to investigate in thread but got no reply from you.


Am I to assume that you have been back, and had your posts removed because of this infraction, and now you are trying to play the victim again?
A behaviour I seem to recall you using in the past.

The "potentially helpful section" can be everything it should be, if people don't try to white ant it with deceitful behaviour, and continual undermining as has appeared to be the case from some members.

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

The fact that people assumed that the image was of my doing was their assumption and their assumption alone.

I did not say that I photographed the image in my thread nor did I attempt to reply to any responses.

I posted the image to demonstrate that even when the image was made by a master artist there will always be people who want to suggest changes.

The artist had obviously been very deliberate in making every pencil stroke to achieve a truly realistic result yet to some who responded there were aspects of the image that they thought they could improve upon.

I put the image up in order to highlight a potential problem and to promote discussion with regard to the value of critique coming from people who are not necessarily qualified to do so.

I did not "steal" the photograph as has been suggested, there was no indication of the artistic originator and I saved the image from a Google search result freely and without impediment.

As I received no advantage, financial or otherwise, to any detriment of whomever the artist was, no copyright infringement was committed and I was therefore no in breach of UHH rules.

I believe, in fact, that the artist would be exceedingly flattered that his or her drawing was so utterly convincing.

You did indeed voice your reservations regarding the image and I was about to "let the cat out of the bag" when, without being given any benefit of a PM I was treated with a far greater level of disrespect than I myself have ever been accused of.

I am not playing the "victim" because I don't feel as though I have been victimized, I am simply the target of those too cowardly to confront me directly.

All that has happened is that Nightski and Co have bowed to pressure and shut out someone who from time to time causes people to rethink certain perceptions.

Having to do so was apparently too unnerving for them so they chose to shoot the messenger instead.

Rob.

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

No Rob.
People assumed it was your image because it is a forum for people to post their own photos and have people critique them.
I'll repeat that one.
People assumed it was your image because it is a forum for people to post their own photos and have people critique them.

It is not a forum for people to post Joe Blows image and have that commented on.
The fact that people assumed it was your image was because of your deception by neglecting to say it wasn't yours.

You yourself admit that you were trying to deceive people into commenting unfavourably on a "masters image".
And now you apparently want to gag people that you do not think are qualified to comment - and that was your reasoning for the deception.

Is that also the reason for badgering the crap out of people if they dare voice a critique that you deem wrong??

So ... you don't feel "victimised" but you feel you are "a target", you might have to run me through the logic of that one, sounds like doublespeak to me.

And you received no advantage?? You attempted to make yourself look smart and to make other people look stupid, but you received no advantage?

You were about to "let the cat out of the bag"?
You had 2 days to "let that cat out of the bag" and you didn't. Even when I asked the question a second time, you had at least an hour or more, to post an explanation before I posted my comments on why I thought the image was a drawing, and Graham posted a link to the true work.
And still you did not post anything "letting the cat out of the bag".

You weren't treated disrespectfully at all, that thread was treated with the respect that it deserved.
Nightski and Co didn't bow to any pressure.
An issue was raised and they referred it to ADMIN.
ADMIN acted very properly and efficiently.

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

Firstly I don't live for this stuff and unlike some, I don't monitor it constantly. In addition there is a considerable time difference. The C & C section is a sad disappointment and is now nothing more than a glorified version of facebook. If you are the best ambassador they could come up with and you are too thick to understand what my point was then feel free to go back and play those smile and pat-on-botty critiques some of you seem to revel in.

djtravels Loc: Georgia boy now

OK people. T'is the season to be jolly. But, think of it another way. If we can love one another and be thankful, for one day, why can't we do the same EVERY day? Peace on earth. OK?

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

Merry Christmas Lighthouse.

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

I know exactly what your point is W/R.

You think you challenge people W/R?
Yes you do.
The problem is that you do it with a condescending air, and try to rub their nose in it, as if you are a master.
I have seen no evidence of you being a master.

There is no time difference whatsoever.
I am in the same time zone as you.

I am not trying to be their ambassador. I am just filling in a few relevant facts that you decided to leave out in your original post in this thread.

And if you think your description describes my critiques, then it is obvious, that you are having an opinion on something you haven't even read.

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

No, I don't claim to be a master of anything with the exception of my profession however, with one exception, being that I accidentally placed one extra zero in a number, no-one here has ever proven me to have made an incorrect statement.

The time difference? How the hell am I expected to know where you live when according to your profile you have no home.

I thank you for being so relevant and forgive me for mistaking you as the C & C ambassador, I didn't realize that you were not sticking up for them.

Your critiques? There are a number of people who just don't seem to have their eyes and their brains wired in the same circuit. I would have liked to think that you are not one of them but I just saw your latest post regarding the grey blob in the snow. If that is your idea of a good, sharp, well-focused image I have some rather thick spectacles which might assist with your problem.

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

See, that is it.
You think you read something and its not what I said.
I did not say - "good sharp well focused image."
I said "as I said in my first post in this thread - that Jim did get the focus in the right place."
Can you not see the difference between the two statements??

Graham Thirkill Loc: Idylic North Yorkshire, England UK.

[quote=lighthouse]No Rob.

You had 2 days to "let that cat out of the bag" and you didn't. Even when I asked the question a second time, you had at least an hour or more, to post an explanation before I posted my comments on why I thought the image was a drawing, and Graham posted a link to the true work.
And still you did not post anything "letting the cat out of the bag".
---------------------------------

The Graham mentioned above is not Graham Thirkill 098
====== =============

Graham Thirkill
098

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

Yes, I see what you are saying....that he focused in the right place as you said.

It's just that he was entirely unsuccessful in achieving it.

Sir, you are a good critic and I do agree with much that you have suggested and pointed out with regard to people's photographs, but how many are there that say how nicely executed a shot is when what I see is a poorly exposed, blurred and over processed mess.

The worst of it though, and you know whom I am talking about, is the OP who very recently posted on the Critique Section, who accepts only praise and who snaps smart-ass answers to anyone who dares to question, because his only motive for posting is for self promotion.

If that sort of conduct is acceptable to Nightski then she truly has lost control.

Rob.

robbygb Loc: UK

Happy Christmas Winterose.
As it's the season of goodwill, could you post some of those pics of the pelicans you put up a few months ago, I missed them. My friend Wabbit, said they were outstanding.

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

Rob, The fact is, you were suspended and weren't allowed to even comment.
Is that right?
And then I assume you got all hot under the collar when your comments were removed?
How am I going so far?

And why do you single nightski out?
It looks to me like you and a couple of others have done nothing but try to undermine what those ladies are trying to put together there.

You could be a so much better person than you are Rob.
I think a description of one who "accepts only praise and who snaps smart-ass answers to anyone who dares to question" could go to more people on this site than where you have it aimed.
I could aim that description squarely at you and not too many people would disagree with me.

And the gentleman in question that you refer to does happen to be a very good photographer.